"At Its Simplest, Bulk Purchasing Is…" - John Martin

Wait a minute. There this is the second episode? I I wasn't your your first guest?

Devastatingly so. You are not the first. Alright. Ryan Mandel stole your thunder.

That's alright. Then the bar is kinda low. I'm ready.

And I need it, and I want it. And now I wonder if I get all of that place. Do you think they'd let me win? Because you know I'll buy a 1,000 slaves if I can just have that money.

Well, hello there. Happy New Year. Welcome to the Rules of Luck, a podcast dedicated to the hardworking lottery employees who make this industry possible. I'm Byron LaFleur, and I hope you enjoyed my parody. First, let me thank you for the incredible response to our first episode.

It had hundreds of downloads, which inspired me to make another. I was hoping to release it in December, but the holiday season in full swing, I decided to wait until everyone was back and ready for more. Joining me today is John Martin, director of the Maryland Lottery and Gaming Control Agency. We'll spend the majority of the episode discussing bulk purchasing, when a person or entity buys as many tickets as possible in hopes of guaranteeing a prize. There's a wide range of opinions on how the industry should address these groups, and John offers some particularly insightful perspectives on the topic.

But before we dive into that, John and I discussed a December article from The Economist titled, America's gambling boom should be celebrated, not feared. It highlights how Americans wager nearly a 150,000,000,000 on sports in 2024, up from 7,000,000,000 in 2018, and another 80,000,000,000 in online casinos. I found the parts about lottery particularly interesting, and I'll link the article in the description if you'd like to read more. And now without further ado, let's get on with the show.

You know, it's an interesting read, and and I always appreciate, getting different different perspectives on people, whether they're they're US based or or offshore, whether they're involved in the lottery industry, the gaming industry, sports wagering. You know, there's so many diverse opinions, and this is clearly an emerging, industry across all fronts. So I think, you know, we certainly have a lot to learn. And anytime you can get different ideas, sit at the table and discuss that, I think it makes for a better makes for better policy, makes for better programs, and hopefully makes for a better consumer experience as well.

Yeah. I absolutely agree. And I do think that it is fascinating to see the online gambling market explode in the United States. Obviously, it's well documented, you know, kind of our puritanical past and our aversion to things like gambling and to see this kind of laicized guilt in a lot of our policies decisions, especially across the country. And now it's kind of, I think, with the opening of technology, with the Internet, it's kind of being much more widely accepted.

Well, it's it's certainly obvious that that it is, I don't know if polarizing is the right word, but there certainly is a camp and and a mindset that says, you know, this is this is the root of all evil and and we're, you know, we're going down the path in a hand basket here and it's it's just not going to it's not gonna end well and and, you know, people are going to be ruined and and for generations. Then you have the other side, which is, you know, obviously, capitalism reigns and and, you know, freedom reigns and and and, you know, people should have the opportunity to spend their money the way they want to. And I I, you know, I hear both sides of it, and and I I think I'm gonna take the Goldilocks approach on this and and try to find something in the middle, you know, a more centrist approach. Clearly, we need guardrails on all that we do. We have it in the lottery.

We have it in casino gaming. We have it in in sports wagering. And and I think guardrails can be and should be a good thing, not only in our industry. Look at look at the the the other industries that that are often linked, to ours and and the guardrails that that they've put in place over over the years. But then I also respect the fact that, yes, people make an informed decision.

You know, as much as some some circles, some politicians may wanna call the lottery or aggressive tax, well, it it's it's not a tax. People make a choice, and and and you have to you have to give them the freedom to make that choice. Now, you can argue and debate and certainly behavioral scientists will do this, that some people aren't in a position to make that choice. Well, okay. I I can understand that point of view, but am I the one to dictate that?

You know, does our body, regulate that? Won't regulate the operators, but we certainly can't regulate and and reach through that and and dictate what the consumer chooses to do.

And, to our listeners who've not read the article yet, John is referring specifically to one section. In fact, throughout this article, which talks about the gambling market in the United States, lottery is only mentioned 2 times. And the first time it's mentioned, I don't think it's a very flattering light. Quote, considering gambling seedy, unsavory reputation, it's tempting to write all of this off as unhealthy and dangerous. And it is true that for some, gambling is a ruinous addiction.

However, whereas state lotteries are disproportionately played by the poor, the new forms of gambling are less regressive. And I I to me, I was like, really? This is how they do us? Like, I mean, it's just

Yeah. Yeah. And, actually, you could debate whether that was the more or less flattering reference because the second one wasn't much better. But but, yeah, that that's really the again, it's it's a it's it's a snapshot of where this this author is in their mindset and probably didn't do much contemporary updating of of of positioning and where lotteries are. So again, you kind of, you know, take it for what it's worth and move that to the side.

Although, I think, you know, one of the unique things we have here, Byron, in in in Maryland is that, yeah, we we run the lottery, but we also regulate, casino gaming and and have for for nearly 15 years now, and and we regulate sports wagering. And and, yeah, there are a handful of lottery directors that I that I speak with that do have that do wear both hats. But for the majority of states, those are separate siloed, entities with within their their their policy making and their and their regulatory platform. So it it is a little bit of a challenge for us because we've got a, you know, we we we actively promote and manage lottery, but then we also play a regulatory role on on casinos and and, sports wagering. And and, you know, let me ask answer the question you didn't ask yet.

But, you know, a lot of times when I talk to my peers, their concern is, well, well, does that gaming market compete with the lottery market? You know, is that is that that, that sports wagering, demographic, are those people that are now going to abandon their lottery practices and and move over to to the, the sports wagering, especially in a mobile platform, which we regulate here, and we don't have a mobile platform on the lottery side. My response to that is, and that that's a technical term. I don't know if you've used it before. But but my response is no.

No. You know, the the the markets are unique enough. My experience again, I can't speak for for every other jurisdiction. My experience is that the lottery profile, the lottery player, yes, some of them are gonna compare and and and play in the other in the other markets, the the casino gaming and the sports were urging. But for the most part, you are really managing and and and relating to a different player.

And, you know, knock on wood, we have done very well over the last several years, with both the growth and the regulatory side as well as the our traditional lottery side. So it is not a zero sum game. It's not a competitive nature. It's a collaborative nature. And if we do it properly and and do our roles, then there's plenty of plenty of room for both.

I guess one of the areas I think that affects lotteries the most, right, is the advertising side. No matter what, whether you're talking about sports betting or because I casinos or anything like that, really, you do see the expense to try to acquire new players has drastically increased because FanDuel, DraftKings, these companies can spend a lot of money and they are doing so. I don't know if there's any point that you wanna make there, but, I do think that's an interesting if there was one area of extreme competition, that's the online advertising side.

Well, I I I think that that's going to come to a head. And, again, whether it it's going to take things like the, the safe, bet act and on a on a federal basis to to spur the conversation, You know, I'd I'd like to think because I'm here within state government that states should ultimately decide and and rule on on how those things work for their jurisdiction as opposed to a a federal directive or federal mandate. But again, you look at other industries. You you look at the tobacco industry, you look at the beverage industry, and and how they felt over years, and and how things migrated and and shifted in things specifically like advertising. So so I do appreciate that the vulnerabilities for certain populations, advertising can be a trigger and and clearly not in a good way.

And and, I I I think we'll we will have to come to some meeting of the minds to put that in place. My preference is it'd be more on a state level than as a, directive from from from the feds. But but what whatever gets the conversation starting. I I think we and we've kinda seen it here in terms of self regulation. In our initial foray into sports wagering, for for example, we gave all of the, the the sportsbooks, basically free rein in the 1st 12 months of operation, and then started to put some guardrails that limited their promotional play, their promotional spend after that 1st year.

So, predictably, if you go back, it's it's documented, it's it's in the books, it's it's history. You know, the the amount of money being spent by by the, sportsbooks was just phenomenal, that those first several months. And then the 2nd year, you know, they self regulated because we had put the guardrails, and and some states have been more restrictive than that. So I think I think there is a path, particularly when it comes to promotion and things like advertising that that you can manage that and self regulate that. And and I think ultimately that is a good thing.

Now we've already started talking about guardrails. So I think this is the segue into our bulk purchasing discussion. And, obviously, a fascinating topic. We just talked about it at, our La Fleur's 2024 Austin conference. John, you are part of that panel as well as Jay Finks and Ryan Mandel.

And, you know, we did not broadcast that. It was something that I heard repeatedly being the best segment that we have done at the way we did at the conference and have done in a very long time. And so, 1, I thank you for participating in that, but 2, I kinda wanna extend this message out to people who weren't able to hear it, at least get a part of it. Do you mind starting off with just kinda defining what bulk purchasing is and, you know, how this is affecting Maryland?

Yeah. I'd be happy to at least to, to the degree that it is reflective of of Maryland's experiences and and not meant to be an indicator of of what may be happening in in other jurisdictions, but, at its simplest bulk purchasing is the act where individuals or I suppose an individual, but typically is this team effort, come into a market and whether the game is your in state draw game or it happens to be a scratch game with a significant top prize, or a fast play game, which fast play is is our branded version of it here in in Maryland. But when those progressive jackpots made to be significant, and I'm defining it significant as $1,000,000 plus targets for the for the most part. It's how do you manage and limit or restrict someone who may be coming in to purchase those in bulk. They want all available tickets on the scratch game, they want to repeatedly play on a fast play, terminal.

They buy up again every possible combination that they can on a draw game. And and some of these things are, I'm gonna say, more difficult to do than others. And and when I first, you know, just a little history here, when I first heard of this was, the spring of 2023, and, again, Ryan and and Gary Grief at that time made us aware of their in state draw game and the experiences there. And I'm gonna get into that now, it's well documented. And then other directors were piping in saying, yeah, well that happens similarly to us here or happened there.

And I remember hearing it for the first time in the spring of 23 and thinking, boy, I'm glad it's not me. And and hearing them talk about that. And then I thought, you know, we had the situation 2 years prior in 2021 where we had a fast play jackpot of $2,600,000 on a progressive game. So I started to go back and ask some people questions. I did a little digging, a little a little Columbo work.

I did, you may have to Google that for reference, but I put on my overcoat and and looked at it and said, wait a minute. We had things that characteristically were exactly that, and we didn't know the name black swan, as an entity that that kind of band together, to to be the the the driving force behind that. But in fact, we were able to confirm that that 2 years before the Texas incident, we had an effort here in Maryland where, people came in and and aggressively pursued a a progressive style fast play game and won the the jackpot. And, we started talking more about that and sharing other directors, and, again, more director experiences popped up. Hey.

We had something like that here. Gee. We had something like that, in in in our segment as well. And then it's kind of morphed into be a a scratch game. So once the the the dust kinda settled, we had our $5,000,000 top prize, $50 ticket, just, this last spring, where they again, blacks and now they were a little more, I'm not gonna say brazen, but a little more transparent.

They they they came in. They were very specific. They said we were going to buy up every $50 ticket we can, because we wanna win that $5,000,000 prize. And we, again, put it the guardrails and said, well, okay. It's a retail product, and you can only get it at retail.

You're welcome to travel all through our 43 100 locations and and buy them up. But eventually, they were able to win the top prize there again. They then came back again 2 months ago, for another fast play, progressive jackpot. They did not win that time. But again, they were transparent and said we're we're back.

We're we're we're we're doing this. So, and everything they did was technically legally within bounds. They were making valid purchases at retail, but in large quantities. And then so then that starts a conversation, you know, is it fair? Is it equitable?

That's that's then where you get that hand ringing and that's when you sit around the table and think, alright. Our business is to grow lottery sales and the revenues drive from that support good causes throughout the state. We do that responsibly. So now you're gonna now you're gonna try to to to quantify what responsibly means. And, that's what I would encourage any lottery who's who may be watching this, listening to this, or has those conversations or concerns, you really need to localize it.

You need to get your team together and find out what is your take on that. Where are you gonna draw your guardrails, your parameters on whether it's an in state draw game? And quite frankly, I don't think our in state draw games are attractive to this type of activity. Is it a top tier scratch game? Well, we offer $1,000,000 plus top prices on a number of our games, so we have to put in place a plan for retail, how a retail is gonna react to this, or is a fast play game.

And again, we have progressive fast play games, and I think that's probably the easiest because that is purely random. And while they were working one channel 2 months ago to win this top prize, somebody walked in across the state, a normal customer bought it and won. So, again, there's no guarantee that a bulk purchasing effort automatically yields a return and and in securing that top price. So, lots of issues for people to realize and and discuss internally, with your sales team, your marketing team, obviously, your legal counsel, your finance people. Make sure that whatever you put in place, makes sense for you and it it it represents your your policies, your procedures, that you wanna, put in place going forward.

Yeah. I I think you hit it on the head, especially because there is this difference between it's obviously legal. Right? Every single per ticket that they're purchasing is bought legally. There's no reason that each individual one is worse or nefarious, but when you take it in the aggregate, it creates a question of, is it fair?

At least in a public perception, is this fair? And I think that's where it causes so many issues and where we see kind of a spectrum because really on this debate, we've seen states take different positions on this across the board, whether it's completely wrong or, yeah, not only that, but we should, maybe not encourage it, but at least engage with these operators and see, like, what else, what other partnerships can we come come to.

Yeah. And that and that I think you use a good word there with the encouragement of it. I think that's the thing that just, you know, kinda gets people a little twitchy about it is, and many of us do this. Right? You have you have one top prize remaining.

That's a $5,000,000 top prize. Well, what's the line between promoting that so that you engage the general population versus encouraging that where it's heard by a group that says, wow. 5,000,000. Gee. I'd invest a $1,000,000 to win a $5,000,000 top prize.

Now there are very few general citizens who have a $1,000,000 to risk to win a 5,000,000 prize. Are there entities? Are there organizations? Are there groups that may be operating across states? I'm gonna be very careful on how I pick my words, because these are clearly multistate efforts.

We know for a fact that the people in our state have been the very same people to other states. So this is not a random basis. This this is a a calculated determined effort bankrolled by some entity or entities with the express purpose, to win top prices. Think of it as any investment strategy. How is this any different than than an an investment group, buying stocks to to gain a an advantage over time in the marketplace?

I don't know that it is.

I mean, you can you can take a holier than thou attitude and say, well, it's not right, it's not fair. But again, it's not illegal, and it's probably, not a bad business strategy. And the fact that, that, you know, an individual in your state is excluded from that, then that's that's kind of the discussion you need to have within the organization.

There has been obviously lotto manipulations that have happened since, you know, the dawn of the industry. Recently, it's been popularized by the movie, Jerry and Marge go large with Brian Cranston kind of talking about windfall. I guess I think it was Michigan's windfall, and then it was Massachusetts, either the same version or a very similar type of game. And, you know, these were kind of they there were the math behind it. It had some flaws in it that they were kind of able to capitalize on.

But do you see this as wholly different?

In in from my perspective, these are totally different. And I have talked to people who have been in the industry when these other incidents happened, who see it as the same, and I think they're kind of rationalizing it to to protect themselves because, again, you use the word flawed. Those games were flawed. There there was there were math vulnerabilities that smart people exploited. Today, the environment with black swan and any and other similars, it's still a math issue.

They know that at some point, they're gonna get into a game when the likelihood, the probability that that prize is going to be won is in their favor. There's a reason why they don't come in on day 1 of a $5,000,000 top jackpot to to get in the game then. The the math is is not in their favor. So, correct. The the these games are not flawed.

Again, there's there's no one working behind the scenes, in a nefarious way to to game the system. The integrity of the games is never an issue, whether it's a draw game, a scratch game, a fast play game. So people should feel comfortable that that is solid. What is different is the player, and the player when it's an an enterprise or what's an and it's a group with deep pockets who probably plays in other markets. Similarly, trying to gain financial advantage decides they wanna get into your state for this game, and they have a short list of I'm gonna call them agents just because it sounds cool.

You know? I'm picturing, you know, those clandestine meetings, they push an envelope across the table at a diner somewhere in the suburban location, and their instructions are in there to go to these locations and buy this game. And they nod and they wink and they have a little hand signal, and then they leave and they do that. Well, how did I get there? But but, that's that's what I think is is happening.

So, yeah, I mean, that that puts some of the the the the intrigue into it, but there is nothing here, where the games are ever being compromised, where there's anything being done illegal.

Yeah. And I mean, obviously, these groups do I wanna kinda go off on tier, like, agent kind of thing because it does fit. Because not only are they recruiting agents to buy these tickets, they're also recruiting agents, the retailers, right, to help them engage in this behavior. And they're offering a lot of money. That's what makes this so, I think, difficult for us to also comprehend from the retailer side is this is a very profitable, proposition that they're making for these retailers.

One of the things we made, as a after the fact decision was when we first had our, fast play, effort back in 2021 or whatever it was. We didn't know what was happening as it was happening, And they were spending they were spending 100 of 1,000 of dollars in a retail location in search of this top price. We had retailers who were earning more in commission over a 4 day period than they would get all of the previous fiscal year. And you see this opportunity, I I don't fault them. I I understand exactly why retailers I I did not get one call from a retailer who said, you know, this guy has been sitting there and he keeps handing me money and buying tickets.

Should I be doing that? None. No one said that. So one of the things we looked at is wait a minute, then we have to put some parameters in. So we invoked a daily threshold for, amount of sales on a particular game.

And ironically, 2 months ago when they came back, we had this benchmark, this guardrail in place. They hit the threshold at the store. We pulled the plug, and literally seconds later across the state, someone not affiliated with this group, just an averages, and walked in and bought a $2,900,000 winning Fast Play ticket. Had we not put in this guardrail, the person at the store would have kept churning and more than likely would have won it, and Black Swan would have had another notch in their belt. Here, they were denied, and, again, in terms of fairness, someone from the state of Maryland, won the prize.

And so this is kind of the guardrail that we kind of alluded to earlier is that you can put these threshold limits. And correct me if I'm wrong, this is not actually the first time you've put in a threshold limit. You have it with your Keno game as well.

We we again, for similar reasons, not because of a bulk purchase, but just from responsible gaming, and and it has happened. You know, sometimes people will be, in a social environment, sometimes maybe taking advantage of all the amenities of the social environment, and they may be then down a path where they're they may be investing too much in kino or racetracks, which is other monitor game. So we had to put parameters in there to to get guard against or protect player protections. We also found in some cases, unfortunately, when, the other end of spectrum, nobody's in there. It's a clerk who decides, well, what does this button do?

Oh, what does this button do? Oh, and all of a sudden now they're spending money that they don't have. So in both cases, we do have these thresholds and we've had them for years to guard against internal theft and player protections on responsible gaming. So having those in place there, we never even considered them on the fast play game. I mean, who's gonna come in and keep buying fast play tickets?

Well, we found out who and how and when, and so we put that parameter in place. But that's you're right. That's the thing I talk about where you're gonna have to make that decision lottery, mister or miss lottery director. What what's the policy? What do you wanna do?

If you offer these types of games, where do you wanna put the guardrails that make sense for you? Not because they work for me, not because I'm compelling in this forum and you and you're captivated by what I have to say, but that it works for you. And, you know, hopefully if we if enough states do that, are we gonna stop Black Swan? I doubt it. But maybe we'll give them a reason to to rethink their business model.

Yeah. Because I and I think this is probably the most interesting part of this whole conversation because it's legal and because there's a lot of money in it. It's basically impossible to prevent completely. Right? Like, essentially, it becomes a an equation of how much time, energy, and money are they willing to dedicate to trying to win this jackpot or, you know, instant, prize?

And by creating, I guess, barriers that they have to overcome, you increase the amount of money they might be willing to pay.

I'm gonna take that same argument and just flip it, and flip the coin on it. And it's not so much how do we make it difficult for them. How do we make it more equitable? How do we make it fair for the players? And and if a player says, yeah.

I I just wanna know that when I go in there, I have an equal opportunity and that I'm not competing with somebody on the other side of the state who's just hammering away at it, all day long. So, so it's really more about how do we make it more equitable, how do we get the player protections in place, then how do we make it more difficult? Because in any effort like that, making it more difficult sometimes just challenges people on that side to come up with a different a different way to do that.

Obviously, we're talking about them winning. Right? Guaranteeing themselves to win the jackpot. But you already said that they have invested more money at times than they've got received back. Obviously, that's a losing proposition.

And I do kind of wonder how much it takes. Like, if there's multiple black swan groups, right, and they start splitting the jack pot and they get make less and less and less money, you know, at what point does then that become completely fine, right, where it's like, okay, hey, they there's a losing proposition. These are all this is money going to a state organization. They're not receiving enough. It's I don't know.

Like, I guess my question is is does that ever justify it where they are just not able to recoup their investment?

You know, they're they'll have to make those those types of decisions. I I I know when they first came in in 2021 in Maryland to pursue the first $2,600,000 progressive jackpot. This is before I heard of Black Swan. This is before the 2023 Texas, draw game incident. They they certainly spent, and they identified 4 locations, all liquor stores, all independents.

They knew they could could pretty much commandeer those those locations and and had 4 different people sitting in those stores, working through. And and, again, they spent more money collectively as a group in 4 days than they won. But I chalked that up from their perspective as, well, maybe this was their this was their learning curve. Right? This was this was them refining their process.

So and clearly, they refined it well enough that that it got to be more efficient for them, downstream. So, again, if they're being bankrolled, and I don't know this, but if they're being bankrolled by a large group who certainly has deep enough pockets to spend more than they get, Well, I mean, that's kind of the issue of of gambling to start with. Right? I mean, that's, that's that's when you invest in the stock market. I mean, you you know, the if if if you're in the financial risk business, broader scope, you're, you know, you're always putting capital at risk for a potential return.

Sometimes that works, sometimes not so much. So I I would say that, you know, they're they're learning from all these things. It wasn't random. It wasn't haphazard. The guy who won in 2021, and where, you can you can claim, anonymity here in Maryland.

So, you know, his his story was very brief, no picture, but he was back here 2 months ago. So the these this is a group that is organized and and consistent and and pervasive. I know that this guy has been in multiple states here in from the mid Atlantic up through New England. So again, these these guys travel. They're they're they're bankrolled.

They're focused. They play within the lines. They're they do, everything they can to accommodate and be transparent. So, again, it's all all fun stuff when the lottery staff needs to sit around and make up their mind on how they wanna proceed.

Do the sales from these operations justify engaging in this, you know, or not putting up guardrails? I think of your organization, Maryland, what, last year generated almost $3,000,000,000. Right? Like, is this moving the needle at all in a serious manner?

You know, that's that's an excellent question, and and, unfortunately, you only have after the fact accounting to, to to figure that out. I mean, you really can't do it in process. I mean, theoretically. Right? I mean, you're you're just you're just accelerating that that timeline.

If if that game organically would have through its normal play rates taken 3 more months before it was hit. And it was the same dollar spend, but all you've done is now accelerated that dollar spend, dollar for dollar in 5 days. Well, I guess from the accounting ledger, it looks the same. In the case of, this last win 2 months ago, where they invested a fair amount of money, but somebody else won, well, again, it's still that kinda gets lost in the in the accounting. So, yeah, I I I don't know.

I mean, you you could have to look at each each jurisdiction, but I I think your question is well positioned. I'd well, there probably isn't a a significant revenue boost. Maybe just the the timeliness of it is condensed. But again, over the course of a fiscal year, it probably gets, evens out.

You know, one area that obviously and this would require an insane amount of capital to be able to do this, but I think what happens if they go after a Powerball? Right? If, you know, whatever when that threshold hits after $1,000,000,000 or whatever it is, if they go in, that could be obviously a national story, not just located to just one jurisdiction. What do you think the ramifications of that would be? Or is it just such a high threshold to reach that it's just not even worth, like, being worried about?

Oh, I think people should be worried about it. I I I would never assume that some threshold or some, technology is so far out of reach that it couldn't possibly happen. I wouldn't have anticipated this conversation 3 years ago, 4 years ago. So I I I think and, again, I can't speak for for muscle. We are a muscle member.

I I know that the conversations are are always in play. You know, you look at the technology, you look at how things have evolved, you look at where ILottery is today with number of jurisdictions, you look at the, the the technology to produce play slips electronically, digitally on on your phone. So is it potential that you could get, again, a network of people focused on a, $1,000,000,000 plus jackpot, and what would it take? What level investment would they be willing to make with the big risk that there isn't a second winning ticket? I mean, that's again where where that kind of is different than a scratch off ticket or a fast play where there is one ticket, there is one winner.

You're not gonna split that. Either get it or you don't. It's a binary decision. You either got it or you didn't. In a Powerball Mega Millions scenario, it's a different different set of math.

And, again, as I said in the outset, these are people that are excellent at math, and they may determine that that financial risk of a second or third ticket, you know, maybe it made sense in Texas, but it might not make sense on the national basis. So there's there's a lot of decision making on both sides. The decision making on the on the, black swan type entities to to is it a is it a risk they're willing to take on their side? But I would not be asleep, at the wheel here on on the muscle or mega side and think, couldn't happen. I I think and I'm sure those discussions are going on.

They just they don't invite me in those meetings. So, there's probably a good reason for that. But, yeah, I'm sure those conversations are going on, and they should.

John, thank you so much for coming in. Do you have any closing thoughts you wanna leave us with?

No. I think this was a great rehearsal. So when do we go live?

I was writing, I was putting, I was probing on the computer to know a little bit better the lottery industry. Interviews researching on monopoly, fast play and cash pie. And when I'm down on the desktop, I post it on the website and see who comments, but no one ever does. I'm not Terry and I'm not Bruce, and that's his soul. The countdown's for you.